jacobgkau

The FAQ at the bottom of the article says it'll default to off for people in the EU, the UK, Canada, Brazil, Australia, and South Korea. Are you in one of those places?

While I disagree, it's beside your point, because Mumble and Ventrilo also used the term "server." All three also required installing a client application, which Discord did not (my recollection is that Discord was the first major WebRTC application, and that made it a killer feature in itself at the time).

Animations from peoples' names and from their super reactions playing over other content after happening to move my mouse over them is something I'd consider a slight usability issue.

> I'm not claiming to be a good person...

> I can be a dick and…

> I do it... for a... mental health boost...

Sounds like a very healthy mental health regime, LOL.

You're now arguing that "it's not that serious, bro, it's just a joke." But my point in the first place was that the "joke" made no sense.

> I hope every dev realizes by now that there's no meaningful difference between a git clone back then and using LLMs now.

There is a difference between running a command to copy someone else's entire project (which you might then do whatever with, including manually building on top of or copying things from), and running a prompt to generate a new project (which you're then going to consider "your own").

Is it just a default theme difference, or is the current version actually less themable?

Also, the person you replied to mentioned Moksha; that's a fork of Enlightenment 17 (which is what at least two of your cool-looking example screenshots appear to be from).

Should it? Or should it say it can't be sure and to ask a doctor?

Doctors might do the same thing, of course, but at least then there's a real (accountable) person responsible for deciding that "threshold."

I see, you're supposedly just amused by annoying people... that certainly makes you look better, I can see now why I was downvoted. /s

If you think your nagware is going to get back at US citizens for completely unrelated policies you're mad about, then maybe you should list those policies in your message instead of bringing up tariffs? That seems like it would be more productive to your goals, and less likely to make it look like you're salty and/or making a faulty argument regarding tariffs.

That's a vague and borderline off-topic suggestion, imo. When the problem is too many malicious visitors hammering your server, the amount of time it takes the visitors' browser to run the JavaScript is not the issue; on the contrary, when dealing with this issue, you might as well do more rendering client-side to offload as much work from the server side as possible (hence the Anubis-esque defense of adding random JavaScript work that isn't even necessary to render the real page).

> “hi there North American IP, I know how much you like extra hassle hence the love of effectively paying for tarriffs, here, have a little extra work on me!”

I'm assuming you're outside the US based on having this idea.

You might as well just say "I'm mad at your country for the tariffs, so here's an extra wait." From the fact you feel the urge to spite people in a tariffing country like this, it's clear the tariffs have had some negative effect on you, which goes against your narrative that they're "effectively paid for" by those in the tariffing country who voted for it.

That is an interesting fact to hear. I don't think my toll road account in Colorado has periodic "service fees," either, though; I only pay for transponder replacements and when I use the toll roads.

But aside from that, I don't think that means you only need one state to get unified transit off the ground. Every locality that operates public transit would need to be on-board. (Even if CTA started taking payments via Illinois toll road accounts, me swapping my Colorado toll road transponder for an Illinois one wouldn't help me use RTD unless they're also on-board.)

I think the bigger implication you've pointed out is that if toll road & public transit payments become integrated in lots of different jurisdictions, it could come along with free multi-jurisdiction transit integration via the existing multi-jurisdiction toll integration. But it would still require that toll/transit integration to be built out in lots of different places first.

It's funny, reading that list, it all gives me an instinctual "less-nice neighborhood I wouldn't want to live in" vibe. But I'm sure it's perfectly normal for people who live in more exciting places.

> In fact, in 2008 Congress passed a bill specifically mandating a unified toll payment system, but nothing came of it because the bill had no actual teeth.

E-ZPass now has interoperability with the Central United States Interoperability Hub (which reaches as far west as Colorado and as far south as Texas). We're much closer to the point where you can drive anywhere with a single transponder than we were back then. The main thing missing now is California cooperating with anyone else.

I like the idea of my toll road account also being useful for public transit, if nothing else. But it's difficult to imagine toll road operators and public transit operators seeing a big incentive to cooperate in that way. Even though they're both "pay for transit," their intended/typical users are very different (people who can't/won't drive vs. people who not only drive but are privileged enough to pay for less traffic).